RFD: A modest proposal #1: /opt

Christopher Faylor cgf@redhat.com
Thu May 22 19:17:00 GMT 2003

On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:41:38PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>This conversation died out without a conclusion last month.  If nobody
>else cares very much, but I think this idea is
>peachy-with-a-side-of-keen, does that mean I win? <g>
>Seriously, may we extend the 'official cygwin file system standard' to
>include an FHS-like /opt tree, for RARE use (e.g. only when the
>cygwin-apps community, during ITP discussion or package-review phase,
>arrives at a consensus that package FOO will be allowed to live in /opt)?
>IMO, the only current candidates for "/opt" treatment -- if we choose to
>allow it -- are the ast-open toolset, and the kerberos toolset, which
>each provide alternate implementations of existing tools in other
>packages.  (I think the emerging symlink-based solution w.r.t. to pdksh
>and ast-ksh is appropriate; I don't think ast-ksh should be an /opt
>package.  But ast-open should be.)

I really don't care if we decided to include /opt, fwiw.  I don't have
strong feelings either way.

cg ever helpful f

More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list